Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.
Arizona protesters at an anti-Trump rally who filed a class action lawsuit over the violence they allegedly suffered at the hands of the Phoenix Police Department have received Class certification.
The protesters say they experienced excessive police violence at a Trump rally that took place on Aug. 22, 2017.
The decision to grant certification to the Trump protesters, despite the Phoenix Police Department’s arguments that the proposed Classes of protesters should not be certified, was made by U.S. District Judge John Tuchi.
The protesters proposed a damages Class of individuals who had been in a “Free Speech” area designated for those opposing Trump. Additionally, the protesters had proposed two subclasses — once Class of those who had been “unlawfully dispersed by the use of gas, pepper spray, pepper bullets, or chemical agents” during the protest, and a Class of those who were “unlawfully dispersed by the PPD by being struck by projectiles of any type.”
The protesters also sought to established an injunctive relief Class of those who were present at the protest on Aug. 22 protest or who might participate in a protest in the future “in the exercise of their rights of free speech and assembly” without engaging in activities that justify the use of force.
The Phoenix Police Department attempted to fight back against Class certification, saying that the protesters’ establishment of a Class of those who had suffered damages would require the court looking into the damages suffered by each individual protester. The Police Department contended that this would be unacceptable.
The judge notes that the protesters and the police department interpret the proposed damages Class definition differently. Allegedly, the protesters intend to limit the Class to “individuals who did not engage in certain conduct” that they believe did not justify the use of force.
To alleviate concerns about the definition of the course, the judge clarifies that the damages Class should be defined as those in the “free speech zone” of the protest who “neither threw objects nor attempted to breach the ‘free speech zone’ barrier along Monroe Street” but were nonetheless subjected to forceful dispersal from the PPD, or “other unlawful police activity arising from the police response to anti-Trump protesters.”
The anti-Trump protesters claimed that their protest was peaceful, but police responded to them with violence. According to the protesters, this attack was ordered by Lieutenant Benjamin Moore and Sergeant Douglas McBride.
The police department attempted to claim that the violence was used in response to protester behavior. According to the protesters, the police’s violence was out of proportion to what the protesters say amounted to a few thrown water bottles by only a couple of people.
Have you ever been subjected to police violence? Share your story in the comments below.
Puente, Poder in Action, and the protesters are represented by Kathleen E. Brody and Darrell L. Hill of ACLU Foundation of Arizona; by Dan Stormer, Joshua Piovia-Scott, and Cindy Pánuco of Hadsell Stormer & Renick LLP; and by Daniel J. Pochoda.
The Anti-Trump Protest Police Violence Class Action Lawsuit is Puente, et al. v. City of Phoenix, et al., Case No. 2:18-cv-02778-JJT, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona.
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING
Top Class Actions is a Proud Member of the American Bar Association
LEGAL INFORMATION IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE
Top Class Actions Legal Statement
©2008 – 2024 Top Class Actions® LLC
Various Trademarks held by their respective owners
This website is not intended for viewing or usage by European Union citizens.